乳腺癌保乳术后常规、三维适形及两种调强放疗技术剂量学评估(英文)

Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare the dose distribution and dose volume histogram (DVH) of the planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk (OARs) among conventional radiation therapy (CR), three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT), two-step intensity-modulated radiation therapy (TS-IMRT) and direct machine parameter optimization intensity-modulated radiation therapy (DMPO-IMRT) after breast-conserving surgery. Methods: For each of 20 randomly chosen patients, 4 plans were designed using 4 irradiation techniques. The prescribed dose was 50 Gy/2 Gy/25 f, 95% of the planning target volume received this dose. The cumulated DVHs and 3D dose distributions of CR, 3DCRT, TS-IMRT and DMPO-IMRT plans were compared. Results: For the homogeneity indices, no statistically significant difference was observed among CR, 3DCRT, TS-IMRT and DMPO-IMRT while the difference of the conformality indices were statistically significant. With regard to the organs at risk, IMRT and 3DCRT showed a significantly fewer exposure dose to the ipsilateral lung than CR in the high-dose area while in the low-dose area, IMRT demonstrated a significant increase of exposure dose to ipsilateral lung, heart and contralateral breast compared with 3DCRT and CR. In addition, the monitor units (MUs) for DMPO-IMRT were approximately 26% more than those of TS-IMRT and the segments of the former were approximately 24% less than those of the latter. Conclusion: Compared with CR, 3DCRT and IMRT improved the homogeneity and conformity of PTV, reduced the irradiated volume of OARs in high dose area but IMRT increased the irradiated volume of OARs in low dose area. DMPO-IMRT plan has fewer delivery time but more MUs than TS-IMRT.     

三维适形与调强放疗技术在胃癌术后放疗中的剂量学比较

目的比较胃癌放疗中三维适形放疗(3DCRT)和调强放疗(IMRT)技术的剂量学差异,为临床应用提供参考。方法采用3DCRT治疗的5例胃癌术后患者,放疗时使用了主动呼吸门控技术,以减少呼吸引起的器官运动。IMRT计划采用7个共面等间距野,仅用于剂量学比较。患者靶区设定的处方剂量为至少95%计划靶体积(PTV)接受45.00 Gy,至少99%PTV接受42.75 Gy。根据积分剂量体积直方图(DVH)比较PTV受量和相关正常器官的受量差异和剂量分布。结果与IMRT相比3DCRT的剂量均匀性和适形度略差,但两者在PTV受量上剂量相似。对左、右肾受15 Gy剂量的体积百分比(V_(15))而言,3DCRT好于IMRT;从正常肝的平均受量及V_(30)上看,IMRT稍优于优势;在脊髓的受量上两者相似。结论3DCRT技术在主动呼吸门控辅助下,PTV和部分正常器官的受量上可接近或者达到采用相等野数的IMRT的结果。     

左乳腺癌保乳术后不同放疗方式的剂量学比较

目的:评价左乳腺癌保乳术后三种放疗方式（3DCRT,IMRT,VMAT）的剂量学特点。方法:选取本院2015年5月至2016年2月期间20例早期左乳腺癌保乳术后放疗患者,所有靶区及危及器官均由同一高级放疗医师勾画,包括临床靶区（CTV）、计划靶区（PTV）及危及器官（OAR）,并由同一高级放疗物理师分别设计3DCRT、IMRT、VMAT 三种治疗计划,处方剂量为50 Gy。比较三种计划的计划靶区（PTV）的靶区均匀性指数（HI）及适形度指数（CI）,最大剂量（Dmax）、平均剂量（Dmean）、最小剂量（Dmin）;肺、心脏的V5,V10,V20,V30,V40,Dmax,Dmean及Dmin等。结果:3DCRT、IMRT、VMAT三种放疗计划适形度指数（CI）分别为 0.75±0.08、0.84±0.04和0.89±0.04(P＜0.05),均匀性指数(HI)分别为 0.11±0.12、0.11±0.08 和0.10±0.09。VMAT与IMRT计划降低了危及器官高剂量区体积,但相应增加了低剂量区体积,尤其VMAT计划的心脏、患侧肺V5、V10明显增加(P＜0.05)。结论:IMRT计划不仅提高了靶区的适形度,而且降低了心脏和肺的低剂量受照体积及平均剂量。因此,IMRT计划更适用于左乳腺癌保乳术后的放射治疗。     

胸中段食管癌三维适形放疗、调强放疗及旋转调强放疗的剂量学研究

 目的　研究胸中段食管癌三维适形放疗（3DCRT）、调强放疗（IMRT）、旋转调强放疗（IMAT）3种放疗计划的剂量差异。方法　选取胸中段食管癌患者15例,以Varian Eclipse 8.6计划系统分别设计3DCRT、IMRT、IMAT 3种放疗计划,其中3DCRT采用5～8个共面射野,IMRT采用7个共面射野,IMAT采用2个弧度。比较3种计划的剂量学差异。结果　IMRT、IMRT的靶区均匀指数（HI）、适形指数（CI）、95 % 计划靶体积（PTV）体积剂量均优于3DCRT,全肺V5、V20、V35、心脏V30受照剂量低于3DCRT（t＝2.531,P＜0.05）,而在全肺V10、V15、V25、V30、全肺平均、心脏平均、脊髓Dmax剂量之间三者的差异均无统计学意义（t＝1.325,P＞0.05）。结论　IMAT与IMRT在胸中段食管癌放疗靶区体积剂量覆盖和危及器官保护方面相似,二者均优于3DCRT。IMAT的机器跳数和照射时间均少于IMRT。     

子宫颈癌术后盆腔转移三维适形与调强放疗剂量学对比研究

目的 比较三维适形放疗(3DCRT)和调强放疗(IMRT)在子宫颈癌术后盆腔转移病灶靶区(PTY)剂量覆盖和危及器官(OAR)保护方面的差异,探讨子宫颈癌术后盆腔转移病灶的最佳治疗方案.方法 选择10例子宫颈癌根治术后盆腔转移患者,行CT模拟定位后将数据上传至Varian三维计划系统,勾画靶区,进行放疗计划设计后做下列研究:3DCRT计划与IMRT计划对计划靶区PTV的影响及比较;3DCRT计划与IMRT计划中危及器官受最比较分析.结果 采用95%可信区间,CTV至PTV的外放边界定为1 cm.3DCRT计划中3、4、5和6个射野下PTV适形指数分别为0.46、0.67、0.68、0.68,4个以上射野数日的增加不再显著改善靶区分布和减少正常组织受照射体积百分比.IMRT计划中5、7、9、11和13个射野下PTV适形指数分别为0.75、0.83、0.84、0.85、0.85,9个以上射野数目增加不再显著改善靶区分布和减少正常组织受照体积百分比.比较OAR最高照射剂量,IMRT计划中小肠脊髓的最高照射剂量低于3DCRT,直肠膀胱及股骨头的最大剂量差异无统计学意义.结论 子宫颈癌术后盆腔转移放疗者3DCRT以4个射野数计划为优,IMRT以9个射野数计划为优.高剂量范围内IMRT较3DCRT对脊髓及小肠的保护作用明显,IMRT较3DCRT减少了高剂量区直肠、膀胱的受照体积,从而有望减少OAR放射治疗并发症的发生概率.

Abstract：

Objective To compare the differences of target-volume(PTV) coverage and organ at risk (OAR) protection between three dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy(IMRT) for patients with pelvis metastasis of cervical cancer underwent radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy. To explore the optimal treatment methods for pelvis metastasis of cervical cancer.Methods 10 patients with pelvis metastasis of cervical cancer underwent radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy were selected for this study. The images scanned by CT were transferred to treatment planning system to generate 3DCRT and IMRT plans. The impacts of 3DCRT on PTV were compared with those of IMRT. Isodose line and dose volume histograms(DVH) were used to evaluate to the dose-distribution in PTV and OAR. Results For 95 % confidence interval, the margin from CTV to PTV was 1 cm. Conformal indexs (CIs) of PTV for 3, 4, 5 and 6 fields 3DCRT were 0.46, 0.67, 0.68 and 0.68, respectively. When beyond 4 fields, the advantage of adding fields was not significant. CIs of PTV for 5, 7, 9, 11 and 13 fields IMRT were 0.75, 0.83 0.84, 0.85 and 0.85, respectively. When beyond 9 fields, the advantage of adding fields was not significant. The maximum dose of the bowl and spine cord in IMRT plans were lower than that in the 3DCRT plans (P <0.05). Maximum dose of OAR had no significant differences (includingt the bone, recttum and bladder) between IMRT and 3DCRT plans. Conclusion For patients with pelvis metastasis of cervical cancer after radical surgery, 4 fields planning in 3DCRT and 9 fields planning in IMRT are feasible. At high dose levels, the IMRT plans can more significantly protect the bowl and spine cord and decrease the radiation volume of colorectal and urinary bladder at risk than 3DCRT, so IMRT may potentially diminish probability of the normal tissue complications.     

Potential benefits of using non coplanar field and intensity modulated radiation therapy to preserve the heart in irradiation of lung tumors in the middle and lower lobes

PURPOSE: Investigate whether the use of non coplanar fields and intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) reduces the dose to the heart, in irradiation of middle and lower lung tumors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four plans are compared on 10 CT scans: (1) a reference plan, corresponding to coplanar plan of 3D conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT); (2) a 3DCRT(noncopl) plan, differing from reference plan by the change of one field in non coplanar fields; (3) an IMRT(copl) plan optimized on the same coplanar plan as reference plan; and (4) an IMRT(noncopl) plan optimized on the same non coplanar beams as 3DCRT(noncopl) plan. The equivalent uniform dose (EUD) for PTV was 74 Gy in 37 fractions. RESULTS: In all plans, the 95% isodose surface covers at least 99% of the PTV with very similar conformity index values. A significant reduction in EUD, V30, V40 and V50 is observed for heart when either non coplanar fields or IMRT is used. IMRT also reduces the lung NTCP, V5, V13, V20 and V30 values and esophagus NTCP. CONCLUSION: Both the use of non coplanar fields and IMRT dramatically reduces the dose received by the heart. The largest benefit is seen when the two techniques are combined.     

三维适形放疗与调强放疗在不同肺叶非小细胞肺癌中的剂量学研究

目的 比较不同肺叶非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)的调强放疗(IMRT)和三维适形放疗(3DCRT)的剂量学特点.方法 以肿瘤位于上叶(上叶组)及下叶(下叶组)的各10例接受根治性放疗的NSCLC患者为研究对象,分别制定5野IMRT计划及3～5野3DCRT计划,应用剂量体积直方图评估两组治疗计划,分别比较上叶组、下叶组IMR...     

髓母细胞瘤不同放疗技术剂量学研究

目的 比较髓母细胞瘤常规加速器不同三维放疗技术与断层治疗计划的剂量分布。
方法 2011年12例髓母细胞瘤患者在CT模拟分段扫描后图像耦合,分别进行7个野三维适形放疗(3DCRT)、9和13个野调强放疗(IMRT)计划[全脑全脊髓(PTV)36 Gy,后颅窝加量至54 Gy],对PTV、危及器官剂量参数进行分析并与国外断层治疗计划比较。
结果 3DCRT需设置3个中心,而IMRT只要2个中心。PTV剂量分布9个野IMRT好于3DCRT、13个野IMRT,靶区均匀性指数分别为0.93、0.82、0.89(F=6.17,P=0.02),靶区适形指数分别为0.97、 0.88、0.95(F=5.23,P=0.01)。9个野IMRT与断层治疗的剂量分布类似。
结论 常规加速器全脑全脊髓9个野IMRT可达断层治疗剂量分布且简便易行。     

日本京都大学前列腺癌三个外放疗计划比较

[目的]比较分析日本京都大学医院对局限性前列腺癌实施治疗的三个外放疗计划。[方法]从放疗计划数据库中调取5例局限性前列腺癌的定位CT影像资料，分别按先前的三维适形计划（old 3DCRT）、新的3DCRT（new 3DCRT）和调强放疗计划（IMRT）做计划，根据剂量体积直方图比较各计划剂量分布的差异。[结果]临床靶区（CTV，即前列腺）的剂量覆盖在三个计划中都基本相似并达到理想的剂量分布，但对于计划靶区（PTV），V95、D95和适形指数值在IMRT分别为99％、97％和0．88；在new 3DCRT为93．9％、94．5％和0．76；在old 3DCRT为59．6％、82．9％和0．6。在IMRT计划中PTV的剂量不均整值较new 3DCRT计划中的高；直肠壁接受大于40Gy剂量的体积百分数在IMRT和new 3DCRT中差异不大，在old 3DCRT中最低。[结论]局限性前列腺癌动态弧三维适形放疗计划可以实现和调强放疗计划相比拟的靶区覆盖及对直肠壁的保护，尽管调强放疗计划可以达到更适形的靶区剂量分布，但代价是更高的剂量不均整。先前的三维适形计划达不到目前对PTV靶区的充分覆盖。     

胸上段食管癌三维适形和调强放疗剂量学对比研究

目的 筛选胸上段食管癌不同适形和调强放疗计划优选方案.方法 8例胸上段食管癌cT模拟后参考食管钡餐造影和食管镜结果勾画GTV,按统一标准外扩CTV和PTV,实施3、4、6个野适形治疗计划和3、4、5、7、9、11个野IMRT计划和s-IMRT计划,以95%PTV体积获得6000 cGy处方剂量进行归一,分析各治疗计划靶区剂量分布和危及器官受量,进行剂量学对比研究.结果 3套适形计划之间,PTV剂量参数和体积参数均相近(P＞0.05);6个野适形计划全肺V20高于4个野(P＜0.05),3、6个野适形计划MLD也高于4个野(P＜0.05).6套调强治疗计划中,3个野IMRT计划PTV D100低于9、11个野IMRT计划(P＜0.05);4个野IMRT计划IV高于9、11个野IMRT计划(P＜0.05);9、11个野IMRT计划PTV适形指数CI、剂量参数D95、体积参数V100和V95较57个野IMRT和s-IMRT计划无明显优势(P＞0.05);各IMRT计划之间危及器官受量相近(P＞0.05).胸上段食管癌4个野适形计划PTV CI、PTV剂量参数和体积参数均低于5、7个野IMRT计划和s-IMRT计划(P＜0.05);4个野适形计划全肺V20均高于5、7个野IMRT计划和s-IMRT计划(P＜0.05).结论 胸上段食管癌三维适形放疗中4个野适形计划可为优选方案,调强放疗中5、7个野IMRT计划和s-IMRT计划可为优选方案.胸上段食管癌5、7个野IMRT计划和s-IMRT计划优于4个野适形计划.     

Optimisation of radiotherapy for carcinoma of the parotid gland: a comparison of conventional, three-dimensional conformal, and intensity-modulated techniques.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To compare external beam radiotherapy techniques for parotid gland tumours using conventional radiotherapy (RT), three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT), and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). To optimise the IMRT techniques, and to produce an IMRT class solution. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The planning target volume (PTV), contra-lateral parotid gland, oral cavity, brain-stem, brain and cochlea were outlined on CT planning scans of six patients with parotid gland tumours. Optimised conventional RT and 3DCRT plans were created and compared with inverse-planned IMRT dose distributions using dose-volume histograms. The aim was to reduce the radiation dose to organs at risk and improve the PTV dose distribution. A beam-direction optimisation algorithm was used to improve the dose distribution of the IMRT plans, and a class solution for parotid gland IMRT was investigated. RESULTS: 3DCRT plans produced an equivalent PTV irradiation and reduced the dose to the cochlea, oral cavity, brain, and other normal tissues compared with conventional RT. IMRT further reduced the radiation dose to the cochlea and oral cavity compared with 3DCRT. For nine- and seven-field IMRT techniques, there was an increase in low-dose radiation to non-target tissue and the contra-lateral parotid gland. IMRT plans produced using three to five optimised intensity-modulated beam directions maintained the advantages of the more complex IMRT plans, and reduced the contra-lateral parotid gland dose to acceptable levels. Three- and four-field non-coplanar beam arrangements increased the volume of brain irradiated, and increased PTV dose inhomogeneity. A four-field class solution consisting of paired ipsilateral coplanar anterior and posterior oblique beams (15, 45, 145 and 170 degrees from the anterior plane) was developed which maintained the benefits without the complexity of individual patient optimisation. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with parotid gland tumours, reduction in the radiation dose to critical normal tissues was demonstrated with 3DCRT compared with conventional RT. IMRT produced a further reduction in the dose to the cochlea and oral cavity. With nine and seven fields, the dose to the contra-lateral parotid gland was increased, but this was avoided by optimisation of the beam directions. The benefits of IMRT were maintained with three or four fields when the beam angles were optimised, but were also achieved using a four-field class solution. Clinical trials are required to confirm the clinical benefits of these improved dose distributions.     

肺癌合并纵隔淋巴结转移的三维适形放疗和调强放疗的剂量学研究

目的比较肺癌合并纵隔淋巴结转移的三维适形放疗（3 DCRT）和调强放疗（IMRT）的剂量学差异,为临床应用提供参考。方法选择2007年8月至2008年2月行IMRT放射治疗的11例肺癌纵隔转移患者,利用其CT模拟定位图像分别设计IMRT计划和3DCRT计划,结合等剂量曲线以及剂量体积直方图（DVH）对IMRT计划和3 DCRT计划进行适形性、靶区均匀性和对各关键器官受量进行比较。处方剂量66Gy／33次,治疗时间6周;要求95％靶区体积达到95％以上的处方剂量。SPSS14．0统计软件进行t检验。结果IMRT靶区的适形度优于3DCRT（P〈0．05）,IMRT靶区内超过处方剂量110％体积相比3DCRT放疗靶区内超过处方剂量110％体积减小;在对肺组织的保护上,IMRT肺V20、V30、V40数值均明显小于3 DCRT（P〈0．05）。结论对临床靶区体积大、形状不规则的肺癌合并纵隔淋巴结转移患者,IMRT治疗是较好的选择。     

The Meaningless Meaning of Mean Heart Dose in Mediastinal Lymphoma in the Modern Radiation Therapy Era

PurposeMean heart dose (MHD) correlates with late cardiac toxicity among survivors of lymphoma receiving involved-field radiation therapy (IFRT). We investigated MHD and cardiac substructure dose across older and newer radiation fields and techniques to understand the value of evaluating MHD alone.Methods and MaterialsAfter institutional review board approval, we developed a database of dosimetry plans for 40 patients with mediastinal lymphoma, which included IFRT (anterior-posterior and posterior-anterior), involved-site radiation therapy (ISRT) + 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT), ISRT + intensity modulated radiation therapy, and ISRT + proton therapy plans for each patient. Each plan was evaluated for dose to the heart and cardiac substructures, including the right and left ventricles (RV, LV) and atria (RA, LA); tricuspid, mitral (MV), and aortic valves; and left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD). Correlation between MHD and cardiac substructure dose was assessed with linear regression. A correlation was considered very strong, strong, moderate, or weak if the r was ≥0.8, 0.6-0.79, 0.4-0.59, or <0.4, respectively.ResultsA very strong correlation was observed between MHD and the mean cardiac substructure dose for each plan as follows: IFRT—LV, RV, LA, MV and LAD; ISRT + 3DCRT—LV, RV, MV, TV, and LA; ISRT + intensity modulated radiation therapy—LV and RV; ISRT + proton therapy—none. The following strong correlations were observed: IFRT—RA; ISRT + 3DCRT—LAD, RA, AV; ISRT + IMRT—LA, RA, LAD, AV, TV, and MV; ISRT + proton therapy—LV only.ConclusionsIn the management of mediastinal lymphoma, more conformal treatment techniques can lead to more heterogeneous dose distributions across the heart, which translate into weaker relationships between mean heart dose and mean cardiac substructure doses. Consequently, models for assessing the risk of cardiac toxicity after radiation therapy that rely on MHD can be misleading when using modern treatment fields and techniques. Contouring the cardiac substructures and evaluating their dose is important when using contemporary RT.     

子宫颈癌术后调强放疗和三维适形放疗的临床疗效观察

目的 探讨子宫颈癌术后调强放疗（IMRT）与三维适形放疗（3DCRT）的临床疗效及安全性。方法 选取我院2012年9月至2013年3月60例宫颈癌术后患者,均制定IMRT和3DCRT两种放疗计划,随机分为IMRT组和3DCRT组进行放疗, IMRT组行5野6MV X射线放疗, 3DCRT组行4野6MV-X射线盒式照射,处方剂量均为95％计划靶区体积（PTV）为45 Gy／25 f／5 W。评价PTV和危及器官（OAR）的剂量分布特点;随访两组OAR的急慢性放射性损伤,计算两组3年生存率。结果IMRT组PTV的适形度指数（CI）、均匀性指数（HI）分别为0.80±0.03、1.10±0.01,3DCRT组分别为0.58±0.19、1.09±0.01,差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）;IMRT组膀胱前壁的V10、V20、V30、V40和V45均低于3DCRT组,差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）;IMRT组直肠后壁的V20、V30、V40和V45均低于3DCRT组,差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）;IMRT组直肠和膀胱的急性和慢性放射性损伤发生率低于3DCRT组,差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。IMRT组3年生存率为83.3％,3DCRT组为80.0％,差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。结论 在PTV的CI、HI及保护OAR如膀胱前壁、直肠后壁上,IMRT优于3DCRT。     

Comparison of Electron and X-Ray Beams for Tumor Bed Boost Irradiation in Breast-Conserving Treatment

Purpose

This study aimed to compare the dosimetric profiles of electron beams (EB) and X-ray beams (XB) for boosting irradiation in breast cancer patients who underwent breast-conserving surgery and postoperative radiotherapy.

Methods

For 131 breast cancer patients who underwent breast-conserving surgery, we compared plans for EB and XB boost irradiation after whole-breast irradiation. The organs at risk (OAR) included the cardiac chambers, coronary arteries, ipsilateral lung, and skin. The conformity index (CI), inhomogeneity index (IHI), and dose-volume parameters for the planning target volume (PTV), and OAR were calculated. Postradiotherapy chest computed tomography scans were performed to detect radiation pneumonitis.

Results

XB plans showed a significantly better CI and IHI for the PTVs, compared to the EB plans. Regarding OAR sparing, the XB reduced the high-dose volume at the expense of an increased low-dose volume. In 33 patients whose radiation fields included nipples, IHI was higher in the EB plans, whereas the presence of a nipple in the radiation field did not interfere with the XB. EB-treated patients developed more subclinical radiation pneumonitis.

Conclusion

XB plans were superior to EB plans in terms of PTV coverage (homogeneity and conformity) and high-dose volume sparing in OAR when used as boost irradiation after breast-conserving surgery. A disadvantage of the XB plan was an increased low-dose volume in the OAR, but this was offset by the increased electron energy. Consequently, tailored plans with either XB or EB are necessary to adapt to patient anatomic variance and tumor bed geometric properties.     

Feasibility of using intensity-modulated radiotherapy to improve lung sparing in treatment planning for distal esophageal cancer.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To evaluate the feasibility whether intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) can be used to reduce doses to normal lung than three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3 DCRT) in treating distal esophageal malignancies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Ten patient cases with cancer of the distal esophagus were selected for a retrospective treatment-planning study. IMRT plans using four, seven, and nine beams (4B, 7B, and 9B) were developed for each patient and compared with the 3 DCRT plan used clinically. IMRT and 3 DCRT plans were evaluated with respect to PTV coverage and dose-volumes to irradiated normal structures, with statistical comparison made between the two types of plans using the Wilcoxon matched-pair signed-rank test. RESULTS: IMRT plans (4B, 7B, 9B) reduced total lung volume treated above 10 Gy (V(10)), 20 Gy (V(20)), mean lung dose (MLD), biological effective volume (V(eff)), and lung integral dose (P<0.05). The median absolute improvement with IMRT over 3DCRT was approximately 10% for V(10), 5% for V(20), and 2.5 Gy for MLD. IMRT improved the PTV heterogeneity (P<0.05), yet conformity was better with 7B-9B IMRT plans. No clinically meaningful differences were observed with respect to the irradiated volumes of spinal cord, heart, liver, or total body integral doses. CONCLUSIONS: Dose-volume of exposed normal lung can be reduced with IMRT, though clinical investigations are warranted to assess IMRT treatment outcome of esophagus cancers.